I conducted two pre-conference workshops about ‘Guerrilla IT’
at the itSMF Norway annual event in March 2015. The idea for Guerrilla IT
emerged in conversations with itSMF Norway’s Sofi Falberg at a conference in
2014. We spoke about people feeling the need to make relatively low key and
informal individual contributions to improving ITSM, possibly under corporate
radar. And that’s when I coined the term Guerrilla IT. Then before I knew it, I
had committed to delivering a workshop about it in the new Service Bazaar
format!
I announced the workshop as
follows:
“Do you want to do something really worthwhile in IT yet
keep getting ambushed by mealy-mouthed middle managers with their petty
policies? In this interactive workshop we'll explore and discover how to
identify realistic initiatives and how to deploy them under corporate radar
while keeping out of friendly fire. You'll leave the session with some ideas
for your specific situation as well as an arsenal of weapons for an IT rebel
with a cause.”
In 90 minutes, with a maximum of 8 participants, we
discussed:
1.
The concerns they the participants had at their
organization or in the case of consultants, one of their clients
2.
The relationships that they thought needed the most
improvement
3.
The kind of behaviour that business people and
IT people should exhibit
4.
The factors that drive behaviour, and therefore
need to be changed in order to influence behaviour
5.
The degree of freedom that their organization consciously
or unconsciously afford them to take behave like an IT guerrillero or
guerrillera
6.
Their person appetite for heroic behaviour
7.
The kind of guerrilla IT tactics that, given
their organization’s and their own nature, would be effective
8.
Their ‘rebel’s resolutions’ - the takeaways that
they could apply at work.
The results of the two workshops are summarized below:
1. Participants concerns
- Ill-conceived services being abandoned on the doorstep of the ITSM department
- Lack of IT awareness of the business context and in particular the customers’ interests – in other words no business focus
- The shift from ITSM to Service Management in general
- The difficulties of changing the culture in an organization, in particular resistance to change
- Lack of basic trust
- The challenges of working in a dysfunctional organization
- The challenges of working in a disconnected organization in which IT seems to live in a world of its own
- Change-overload – too much change to deal with
2. Relationships in need of improvement
I gave the participants the following simplistic depiction of the business
(left) and IT (right) to think about.
- Better understanding by ITSM of what the business does and how value is created
- Better understanding by the business of how IT is organized – they don’t know where to go
- More user involvement by business management in formulating needs for IT
- Better insight by ITSM in what users actually do with the systems
- Involvement of users in designing IT processes (usually this doesn’t happen, despite the fact that they are part of the process)
- Better collaboration between AD/AM and ITSM (infrastructure) because of their interdependency
Quotes:
·
“Many BRMs don’t do BRM, they’re just order-takers”
·
“We need IT Relationship Managers in the
business as well as BRMs in IT”
3. Desired behaviour
In each workshop, the group was split up into 2 groups of 4-5
people each.
In the first workshop, one group was tasked with thinking
about the kind of behaviour that IT people should exhibit in their dealings
with the business, and the other discussed the desired behaviour from the
business.
Desired IT behaviour
|
Desired business behaviour
|
Understand the business better
|
Articulate requirements clearly
|
Proactively suggest innovations
|
Have mature conversations with
IT about cost/value (meeting every single business requirement is not
feasible)
|
Understand impact on consumers
|
Understand that IT is not
setting out to do a bad job – the business needs to tell IT clearly what it
needs
|
Understand business processes
in depth and how IT supports them
|
Be aware of IT’s capabilities
and limitations
|
Be less systems-focussed (because
business people don’t think like that)
|
Strike a balance between
business want/need and technical feasibility
|
Understand business output
|
Communicate with IT in terms of
problems, not solutions
|
Focus more on value
|
Invite IT to participate in
business discussions and thereby gain insight
|
Change keeping-the-lights-on to
innovation ratio
|
Build a dialogue with IT
|
Provide honest and simple
reports (referring to misleading reporting with for instance tactically classified
incidents)
|
|
Support shadow IT
(SalesForce.com is OK)
|
|
Build a dialogue with the
business
|
|
Quotes:
·
“'There is a difference between quick and agile”
·
“Get your users involved in #ITSM process design”
·
“There is a problem with 2-way accessibility
between business and IT”
·
“IT needs to hear about desired outcomes from
the business rather than requests for specific solutions”
In the second workshop the participants explored another
perspective, namely the horizontal divide between the executives and managers
who take managerial decisions, and operations (both business and IT). One of
the participants called this gap between executives and operations the ‘Rockwool
syndrome’, referring to the insulation material. Having no real experience with
executives, the ‘executive group’ admitted to having difficulty in getting into
their role, and therefore struggled with their formulation of desired
operations behaviour.
Desired executive behaviour
|
Desired operations behaviour
|
Share the reason for the decisions
made
|
Understand that it’s about profitability
and efficiency
|
Help us (operations) how the
strategy (micro-strategy) contributes to the goals
|
Support our goals
|
Walk the talk. When you make a
strategy, give it the right investment to achieve it
|
Be loyal
|
Ask operations for their
opinions, advice and expertise and incorporate that in the design and
decisions of strategy
|
Understand ‘business to
operations’
|
Map the metrics and
measurements clearly to the strategy
|
Be willing to change
|
Prioritize the strategy impact,
especially when there is scarcity of resources/capabilities and conflicts of
operations to be executed
|
Communicate and inform better
|
Strategy needs to be ‘concrete’
in terms of clarity (e.g. is the service catalogue an accurate reflection of
the strategy)
|
|
Management activities should
also be recognized as processes (processes are not just for operations)
|
|
4. Factors that drive behaviour
- Insight and understanding
- Belief that the new way of working might be better
- A common enemy (or goal – in other words, why are we doing this?!)
- Seeing an opportunity rather than a problem
- Something in it for me
- Urgency (with reference to John Kotter)
- KPIs and incentives that are effective, not those that produce contra-productive behaviour
Quotes:
·
“Uniting against a common enemy can bring IT and
the business together”
·
“We need to focus on opportunities rather than
problems - be proactive not reactive”
·
“Change will not happen unless you can see ‘what's
in it for me?’"
·
“The problem with many KPIs is that they can be
gamed or manipulated.”
5. Organizations’ degree of freedom
Unsurprisingly, the answers to this question varied greatly,
depending on the kind of organization. In a military organization there was
very little room to manoeuver, while in a more administrative public
organisation things were (unconsciously?) very loosely organized. Some organisations
were positioned midway.
Quotes:
·
“There’s a disconnect between how managers think
that things work, and reality”
·
“Processes [descriptions] have to followed, or
changed”
6. Participants’ appetite for heroic behaviour
Most participants thought that they were pretty heroic. None
admitted to being cautious.
7. Guerrilla IT tactics
Justified deception:
One of the participants misled the business by saying that something simply wasn’t
possible to realize, referring to complication (and fictitious) technical
reasons.
Messianic IT: The
phenomenon that an IT hero (not one of the participants) gathered a ‘following’
of users who always used his services instead of the regular channels to the department.
The downside is that when the hero leaves the organization, much knowledge is
lost because nothing is documented (this would undermine the hero’s position).
8. Rebel’s resolutions
Although the participants thought that the time was
well-spent, concrete resolutions for what to do when they got back to work,
were thin on the ground. There was a nodding of heads when some people
mentioned the reinforcement of how important behaviour is, and the realisation that
the business needs to be included in all things ITSM.
REFERENCES
Some of the references below were explicitly mentioned
during the workshops, others I have added after the event.
Motivation (Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose)
> YouTube ‘RSA Animate – Drive’, Daniel Pink
Persuasion (Reciprocation, Social Proof, Commitment and Consistency, Liking, Authority, Scarcity)
> YouTube ‘Science of Persuasion’, Robert Cialdini
Charisma (Presence, Power, Warmth)
> YouTube ‘Olivia Fox Cabane: Build Your Personal Charisma’, Olivia Fox Cabane
Rebels at work
> www.slideshare.net/Foghound/corporate-rebel-ebook, Lois Kelly